1 2025:CGHC:3796 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 105 of 2025 • Smt. Tareshwari Verma, W/o Shri Prasad Kumar, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Vikas Vihar Colony, Vinayak Chowk, Behind Om Hospital Mahadeo Ghat Road, Raipura, Post Sunder Nagar Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). ... Petitioner/Applicant versus • Shri A.O. Lorry, The Deputy Director, Department (Employment) District Employment And Self Employment Guidance Center Raipur (C.G.). ... Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner/Applicant : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Saxena, Advocate. For Respondents : None. Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order on Board 22/01/2025 1. The instant contempt petition has been filed under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for non-compliance of the order dated 19.07.2024 passed in WP(S) No.3983/2024. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in pursuance of order under contempt dated 19.07.2024 (Annexure-C/1) passed in WP(S) No.3983/2024 by this Court, representation of the applicant has been rejected vide Annexure-C/5 dated 20.12.2024 by the respondent authority and they have not complied with the order under contempt in its true perspective, as such this contempt proceeding may be drawn against the respondent. 3. Perusal of order under contempt dated 19.07.2024 (Annexure-C/1) shows that respondent/competent authority was directed to decide the 2 representation filed by the applicant in accordance with law and rule, applicable to the case. 4. Vide Annexure-C/5 dated 20.12.2024, respondent authority has decided the representation of the applicant and declined to grant relief to her, as such order under contempt has been complied with by the respondent authority. Since representation filed by the applicant has been considered and decided by the respondent, thus, no case of contempt is made out, as such I do not find any reason to proceed further in the matter, initiating contempt proceeding against the respondent. 5. If, applicant is not satisfied with the order passed by the respondent authorities with regard to his representation, then he may take recourse to law for redressal of his grievance, if so advised. 6. Accordingly, contempt proceeding is dropped. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge DEEPTI JHA NIRALA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA NIRALA Date: 2025.01.22 16:18:58 +0530